Japan Set Development

[FooBar]

However, my point about the capacity of TIAS is a TIAS only related point. Ie. Needs changing or ability to be changed.

Completely agreed.

Wrt. costs I think both our points were missed.
In the current climate I agree with you: every set needs an option to change costs, so that they all can be made to work with all other sets.
However, if every set would match the default TTD costs, then all sets will match each other automatically and as such none needs a setting to change costs. This then can be done with a single separate grf for all sets at once, if you want higher or lower costs in your game. To me that is the best solution, however I don't think it will ever happen.

[Toni Babelony]

The cost are certainly not properly balanced as they should be, hence the alpha release. I tested it myself and I realised that only the running costs are regulated by parameter in the Japan Set Trains 2.1. In TIAS I've regulated running costs AND purchase costs by this parameter, which shouldn't be at all. So, with the next release I'll adjust this. For now, let the trains only run with the lowest parameter setting to have balanced pricing. I think I'll have the new release ready either this evening/night or tomorrow afternoon.

As for the capacities: I wanted the trains to have realistic capacities, since that is just how I like to play myself (with the cargodest patch and Japan Set capacities at 'very high'). However, I'll also include a parameter that will adjust the capacities for regular games and cargodest in the next release. Just for the sake of gameplay

I think after that TIAS is fine to play with in a normal way.

[paulicus25]

Sounds good. Just remember to rebalance the running costs again if you reduce the passenger capacity . Although i guess you probably knew that. Tis your set after all .

[kamnet]

As an aside, I just tried to view the readme.txt file. It's one gigantic, unstructured, unreadable document. Some formatting would be appreciated.

[Toni Babelony]

Sounds good. Just remember to rebalance the running costs again if you reduce the passenger capacity . Although i guess you probably knew that. Tis your set after all .

Well, that's up to you, the user. In the Japan Set costs and capacity are separated by parameter setting, so that will also directly influence TIAS. However, capacity and loading times aren't separated, so for now I'll just leave it with manual parameters instead of a automatic ones. In the future (with Japan Set 3 Trains) these two (capacity and loading time) will be automatic, so then they'll connect to the Japan Set 3 Trains parameters. For now we just have to live with this (all the more reason to concentrate on the next Japan Set release, after TIAS is optimised).

As an aside, I just tried to view the readme.txt file. It's one gigantic, unstructured, unreadable document. Some formatting would be appreciated.

Ah, sorry for that. I thought a .txt file would appear the same on every computer system. Guess I was wrong. I'll release an .rtf with the next TIAS.

So, for the next release, TIAS will have to appear as a .zip file including:

- TIAS 1.2-alpha (adjusted automatic cost settings, manual capacity and loading times parameter settings);
- the readme in .rtf format;
- GNL v2+ license;
- NML source code;

Anyway, just to let you know what to expect next! :3

[planetmaker]

- the readme in .rtf format;

A readme in plain txt format (UTF-8 encoding) can be displayed by OpenTTD ingame. You might want to consider that in your choice of format

[FooBar]

If one were to use a proper text editor, capable of any flavour of line ending, a text file will look the same on every computer. Windows Notepad is just notoriously bad at reading text files from other OSes.

So just stick with .txt. People who can't read it should get a proper text editor

[Toni Babelony]

So just stick with .txt. People who can't read it should get a proper text editor

So it wasn't me after all. *phew* Yeah, I grew up on MaxOS and I have not much of a clue how other OS'es work. That could be it.

Also, I've been testing a bit with the newly proposed parameters and they seem to work fine. Now all I have to do is adjust the code per item ID (per train), but I don't think I have much time for that today. I'll get on with it as soon as I can!

P.s. I'm a bit overwhelmed with all the positive response and critique from you guys! It really helps me to motivate to improve my skills in NML, programming and legal stuff! I love this forum :3

[krtaylor]

Personally I like doing Readmes in HTML, because everybody in the whole wide world has a browser and they can all handle plain-jane HTML without any difficulty.

[FooBar]

Html files, like rtf files, have the disadvantage of not being accepted on bananas. Only txt and pdf are accepted there. And pdfs can't be viewed ingame.
So you can either do a txt version, or <insert format here> AND a txt version

[Toni Babelony]

Hello all,

I have updated TIAS to 1.2-alpha: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php? ... 20#p998733 Please do note that the download has now become a .zip instead of a direct .grf file. Included with the .zip is the readme.txt

TIAS is now also balanced against Japan Set 2.1 Trains by automatic parameter with:
- running costs;
- capacities;
- loading speed.

All is should be well now.

Next to that, I have uploaded the NML source and all the sprites that are used in TIAS in a separate .zip file.

Cheers and happy testing!

Toni

[PaulC]

While we're on the subject of licenses (sort of), what is the actual licence for the Japan set? The readmes say GPL v2 or later; bananas says GPL v3.

[Toni Babelony]

While we're on the subject of licenses (sort of), what is the actual licence for the Japan set? The readmes say GPL v2 or later; bananas says GPL v3.

Bananas as of now holds the 1.1-alpha still. It won't change until stevenh uploads the newest version (which should be somewhere today, but he's in a totally different time zone ), so please be patient with Bananas as I have little influence on that.

License is GPL v2+ by the way.

[dandan]

While we're on the subject of licenses (sort of), what is the actual licence for the Japan set? The readmes say GPL v2 or later; bananas says GPL v3.

I have noticed that, too. I'm not much of an expert on the subject, but as far as I know GPL v3 did not even exist when work on the original Japan Set began. So I think GPL v2 should be correct. This can be fixed on Bananas when we upload the next version.

[paulicus25]

Big improvement in the purchasing costs and carrying capacities in version 1.2.

However some of the statistics are still insanely high in comparison to the japan set.

Example:
Running on japan set parameters 0 0 2 1

In 1945 (arbitrary date chosen) the 52 Series EMU from the Japan Set has a max speed of 68mph. Each single unit can carry 40 passengers, has 300hp and 110kn and has a running cost of $5,906 per year.

In comparison, from TIAS, the 300/400 1st Type (2 cars) has a max speed of 63mph.

Each double unit can carry 160 passengers (still quite high for 2 units of space. should be more like 100 give or take a few passengers, but liveable. general guide: at this capacity setting for japan set, each unit carries between 40 and 60 passengers).

However, considering the current cargo capacity, 160 charachters, equivalent to 4 units of the 52 series in capacity, even if it had the 1200hp of the 52 series a balanced running cost would be no more than about $24,000 (ie equivalent of 4 units x approx. $6k = $24). Instead it costs $157,000 to run for a year. over 6 times as much as balance should suggest.

Now, taking into account that the 300/400 only has 400hp and not 1200, and that it is 5mph slower, this would suggest a running cost LOWER than $24k for a year, say $18-19k ish.

If you were to reduce this to match the overall capacity scale of japan set, than it would hold say 50 passengers ish per unit resulting in 100 which is 5/8 as profitable so 5/8 as expensive to run. Tis would again reduce the required running cost to about about $12,000 to run in a year.

At the moment, $157k to run in a year means that you simply can't make a profit on it. Infact if you purchased one in your first game year, you would easily be bankrupt within 10 years, as running cost alone would have depleted your potential loan allocation and terminated your business .

Summary:
-Currently still calls the set alpha 1.1 in the grf menu.
-Purchasing costs are fine atm. Well within norms. They are lower than those of the japan set, but within acceptable boundaries, so this is fine for the moment.
-Passenger capacity could still do with tweaking for longer units. Guideline:
When parameter 4 of japan set is set to the following, japan set's carriages hold...
0,1 or 2 - 40-60 per unit.
10,11 or 12 - 50-75 per unit.
20,21 or 22 - 60-90 per unit.
30,31 or 32 - 70-105 per unit.
(stats taken directly from japan set readme/in came observation)
-Running costs are still insane. Here are some general approx. examples for vehicle speed for DMU's at each cost level for 40 passenger volume:

Japan Set Param. 3 ------------ ~40mph -------------- ~60mph --------------- ~80mph
_______0_________________~$3k___________~$4.5k__________~$6k
_______1_________________~$2k___________~$2.5k__________~$3k
_______2_________________~$3k___________~$4.5k__________~$6k
_______3________________~$7.5k__________~$10k__________~$12k
_______4________________~$15k___________~$20k__________~$24k
_______5________________~$30k___________~$40k__________~$48k <Prices your vehicles cost to runusing parameter setting 0 or 2.
Note: In the readme for the set, it states that 0 is "very low" and 3 is "very high" when experimenting with version 2.1a i found that this is not the case, and that 0 simply defaults to "normal" and that 1,2,3,4 and 5 seem to be the cost settings. It's as though the set was modified to have "normal" be the default when set to 0.

It is as though you have created the default costs of the set to be those like you are accustomed to playing with ie the "insane" setting number 5, when you should actually be making them equal to those of the default parameter setting of 2. These should then be "scaled up" automatically by the japan set for the higher parameter values.

My suggestion in order to make the set playable for the time being, is to drop all cargo capacities by approx. 40%, and then reduce all of oyur runing costs to 6% of their current value.

Good luck, and looking forward to testing the next version.

[paulicus25]

Another thing of note.

It seems some of your vehicles are.....duplicated.

There are 2 vehicles of each of the following: some labelled with group labels and some not, with almost identical names and stats...

1000 (1st type) 2 cars - duplicated as the 800/1000 (1st type) 2 cars
1000 (1st type) 4 cars - duplicated as the 800/1000 (1st type) 4 cars
1000 (1st new type) 4 cars - duplicated with the same name
1000 (1st type) 6 cars - uplicated as the 800/1000 (1st type) 6 cars
1000 (1st new type) 6 cars - duplicated with the same name
1000 (1st type) 8 cars - duplicated as the 800/1000 (1st type) 8 cars
1000 (1st new type) 8 cars - duplicated with the same name
600 (3 type) 4 cars - duplicated with the same name
600 (3 type) 8 cars - duplicated with the same name
1000 (2 type) 4 cars - duplicated with the same name - One of these has a typo in it's description (says can only be attached to other 1000 3 Type 4 car units, but these units do not exist. Presumably meant 2 unit, and potentially irrelevant if it's a duplicated loco.
1000 (2 type) 8 cars - duplicated with the same name


In addition, some of your vehicles have Exceptionally variable lifespans, ranging from as much as like 38 years or as little as 3. For example the 600 3 Type locos all have 3 year lifespans, and others have 6 or 8. In some cases, different versions of the same loco with different numbers of cars on have different lifespans. Whether this is intentional or not is another question, but 3 year lifespans? Bit short. Minimum effective lifespan for a vehicle, especially a train, is like 18+ years, otherwise that purchasing cost will only gain you a few years of service before you have to pay it again for a replacement.

[Toni Babelony]

Big improvement in the purchasing costs and carrying capacities in version 1.2.

However some of the statistics are still insanely high in comparison to the japan set.

Thanks for your input! It's been very helpful. I've found out that all the running costs are about 10x too high.

In 1945 (arbitrary date chosen) the 52 Series EMU from the Japan Set has a max speed of 68mph. Each single unit can carry 40 passengers, has 300hp and 110kn and has a running cost of $5,906 per year.

In comparison, from TIAS, the 300/400 1st Type (2 cars) has a max speed of 63mph.

Each double unit can carry 160 passengers (still quite high for 2 units of space. should be more like 100 give or take a few passengers, but liveable. general guide: at this capacity setting for japan set, each unit carries between 40 and 60 passengers).

The thing is that most of TIAS's trains are commuter trains and have therefore a higher capacity than the 52 Series, which is an express train. The exceptions on capacities in TIAS are: dedicated express rolling stock (e.g. Skyliners), shorter trains (e.g. Keisei 33 Type) and early types (e.g. Keikyu Type 1). Otherwise, capacities are relatively high and constant.

However, you are right about the running costs being much too high. I need to adjust these values manually, so that will take some time. At first, they seemed right, until I connected them to an automatic parameter.

The advantage of TIAS should be that they are a bit cheaper to run than JapanSet trains and have higher capacities. The disadvantage is that they cannot run with any other cargo than passengers/tourists and (soon) will have to run on separate tracks eventually (low speed standard gauge tracks).

However, now that I've seen these are not included at all in the public Japan Set, I'll have the TIAS trains switch to Monorails. This is however only a temporary solution. Changing them to another track type is very easy to do anyway.

Anyway, now I have to adjust all running cost settings by hand, so that could take a little while, but I'm really happy with the help I get to improve the set.

It seems some of your vehicles are.....duplicated.

There are 2 vehicles of each of the following: some labelled with group labels and some not, with almost identical names and stats...

Oops. That was an automatic codeline replacement mistake. They should have double IDs, so that's not the problem. One version of each should be available as a max. 8-car only set and as a max. 12-car set. I've forgotten to delete the parameter setting for the max. 8-car only ones. Thanks for pointing that out!

[paulicus25]

Although it may seem like a good idea at the moment, it would actually be a bad idea to run the locos on another track type IMHO.
Firstly, many people play with the shinkansen trains from the japan set as replacing monorail either because:
a.) they have other sets enabled that also have maglev and do not want them replaced
b.) maglev does not account for realistic accelleration and so people decide to place shinkansen on monorail tracks
c.) it's the only way the set is compatible (as far as i can tell) with the japanset version of the total bridge set, which in addition would agai have to be modified to accommodate your new tracks.

Secondly, running the locomotives on an alternate track type severely limits their usefulness. Currently (once you fix the running costs and life expectancies) about on par with japan set locomotives however as soon as you begin breaking up their requirements into a secondary track type then a seperate infrastructure would be required, making it harder and more clumsy to integrate them into an established network.

I tend to find this with "narrow guage" sets that use both types / more than one type of rail. the narrow guage barely sees use due to the severer limitations on traffic type it provides.

IMHO, leave them on regular rail. You can always simply "build a seperate line" and think of it a seperate scale if youre a real stickler for realism. If you're completely committed to providing another type of track, then i suggest you think about adding a parameter into the game, to switch between regular rail versions and a completely new type of rail, which perhaps defines them as either monorail or a "3rd rail" locomotive (which although although unrealistic) would allow the set to be added in addition to monorail and maglev in a way similar to that of the NuTracks Set.

If you do decide to pu them on monorail track, having the parameter to choose to leave them on regular rail, would mean that people who use the shinkansen on monorail tracks will still get the ability to use the locomotives.

In addition, in response to your commuter train comment. The japan set already takes this into account. It has a "commuter train" faster loading modifire on some of it's trains. These are the trains that are at the highest end of the given range. For example, the default size of coaches for a commuter train in japan set i beleive is 60 passengers per unit, as a standard across the board (which in openttd is VERY HIGH as many sets have carriages that contain 20 or 30 passengers). which means that the afforementioned 2 unit train would have 120 passengers, 4 units would have 320 and 8 units would have 640. Which is as many passengers as a jumbo jet. Having much more capacity than that is almost game breaking

[krtaylor]

I believe TIAS only works in OTTD, and OTTD supports more than three track types, does it not? So that's not a limiting factor, you can still have shinkansens and also TIAS trains. But having it as a parameter is still a good idea.

[paulicus25]

AFAIK, theres still a potential conflict. toni was on about replacing monorail tracks, which DO use a specific value which is already coded into the japanset 2.1a grf. Replacing monorail is a bad idea. If he wants to add new tracks, he should add a brand new one.

I know for a fact that this is true since when opening NARS2 and japan set with shinkansen set to maglev replace, 0 shinkansens become available and NARS2 overrided them with maglevs, resulting in me moving the shinkansens to monorails. This also suggests that replacing monorails would conflict with monorail replacement shinkansens coded into japan set 2.1a